[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1050?page=all ]
james strachan resolved AMQ-1050.
-
Resolution: Fixed
browse -QTopic=* does not seem to return anything...
Key:
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-992?page=all ]
james strachan resolved AMQ-992.
Fix Version/s: 4.1.1
4.2.0
Resolution: Fixed
MySQL doesn't honor lock in JDBC Master Slave configuration?
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-756?page=all ]
james strachan resolved AMQ-756.
Fix Version/s: 4.1.0
Resolution: Cannot Reproduce
AFAIK this is now resolved. Let us know and we can reopen if required
Hangs on creating topic on
So if my mental arithmetic is correct the results are
3 binding +1s
6 +1s from the PPMC
so this vote passes. Thanks to all those who took the time to review
the distros.
On 11/14/06, Hiram Chirino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey folks,
I was able to finally get around to doing a binary release
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-761?page=all ]
james strachan resolved AMQ-761.
Fix Version/s: 4.1.0
Resolution: Fixed
ActiveMQConnectionFactory.setBrokerURL does not set all connection properties
corrrectly
Request/Response Option for AJAX interface
--
Key: AMQ-1085
URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1085
Project: ActiveMQ
Issue Type: Wish
Affects Versions: 4.1.0
Reporter:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2601?page=all ]
Vamsavardhana Reddy closed GERONIMO-2601.
-
Resolution: Fixed
Fixed in rev 482109 (branches\1.2) and rev 482113 (trunk).
Remove the Old Keystore portlet
Javamail 1.4 spec needs to be using the JAF 1.1 version.
Key: GERONIMO-2619
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2619
Project: Geronimo
Issue Type: Bug
Security
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2619?page=all ]
Rick McGuire closed GERONIMO-2619.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Committed revision 482117.
Javamail 1.4 spec needs to be using the JAF 1.1 version.
Need to create javamail 1.4 versions of the provider and mail jars
--
Key: GERONIMO-2620
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2620
Project: Geronimo
Issue Type:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2620?page=all ]
Rick McGuire closed GERONIMO-2620.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Committed revision 482122.
Need to create javamail 1.4 versions of the provider and mail jars
Here is log;
17:36:52,852 | ERROR | main | ContextLoader|
eronimo.kernel.log.GeronimoLog 108 | Context initialization failed
org.springframework.beans.factory.BeanDefinitionStoreException: Failed to load
type: org.apache.servicemix.components.HelloWorldComponent. Reason:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2601?page=all ]
Vamsavardhana Reddy reopened GERONIMO-2601:
---
Previous commit broke the Console Realm portlet.
Remove the Old Keystore portlet
-
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2601?page=all ]
Vamsavardhana Reddy closed GERONIMO-2601.
-
Resolution: Fixed
Removed ObjectNameConstants.KEYSTORE_OBJ_NAME missed in earlier commit.
Fixed in rev 482142 (branches\1.2) and rev
Hi Jason,
I had a quick look at the AntHill console and it looked pretty cool. My
initial thought was whether we would be discouraging potential ISVs to
use Geronimo as a basis of their solutions by requiring them to license
AntHill if they want to do their own automated builds/testing of
Exception handling in Console
-
Key: GERONIMO-2621
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2621
Project: Geronimo
Issue Type: Improvement
Security Level: public (Regular issues)
The following jars in lib\endorsed directory
1,010,675 xercesImpl-2.6.2.jar
124,724 xmlParserAPIs-2.6.2.jar
1,831,743 yoko-spec-corba-1.0-incubating-M2-SNAPSHOT.jar
and the following jars in lib directory
326,319 backport-util-concurrent-2.2.jar
324,238 cglib-nodep-2.1_3.jar
38,015
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2221?page=comments#action_12455296
]
Vamsavardhana Reddy commented on GERONIMO-2221:
---
Happens with other Examples too. It is not nice to see these examples fail to
install.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2621?page=all ]
Rakesh Midha updated GERONIMO-2621:
---
Attachment: deployExp.patch
As discussed in discussion thread
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.geronimo.devel/41449
This patch provides
I created a JIRA https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2621 to
handle this improvement.
Paul, I am not sure till what level are you proposing to use dojo widgets. I
made a changes required for this problem for web console deploy portlet.
Following your hint about using dojo widget I
On 12/4/06, Java Energizer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is log;
17:36:52,852 | ERROR | main | ContextLoader|
eronimo.kernel.log.GeronimoLog 108 | Context initialization failed
org.springframework.beans.factory.BeanDefinitionStoreException: Failed to load
type:
Hi All,
is there a way I could locally get rid of the SNAPSHOT or the revision number?
It will really save me a lot of time with the Geronimo v1.2 documentation.
Cheers!
Hernan
Hernan Cunico wrote:
Hi All,
For this release I would like to ask you guys to throw a line or two
listing the areas your worked on that represent new or improved features.
In the past I used to dig into the JIRAs but that took forever and
always felt I was missing a lot. So, this time it would
If I'm getting the picture right, AH is just our solution to
building/testing G in an automated environment. Others are free to
continue to build G the same way they had always been building before.
Cheers
Prasad
On 12/4/06, John Sisson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Jason,
I had a quick look at
Something in that artifact id doesn't seem right. There is a missing piece here
org.apache.geronimo.missing_piece.javamail:geronimo-javamail_1.3.1_provider:jar:1.0-SNAPSHOT
Can you please post the entire error message ?
Cheers
Prasad
On 12/1/06, Apparao Kalimireddy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2613?page=comments#action_12455321
]
Hernan Cunico commented on GERONIMO-2613:
-
Web Access Log Viewer uses just 50% of the available space for the Filter
results: section but the results
Following instructions in provided /example/servicemix-web
README.txt using /apache-servicemix-3.0.1-incubating
and still using Solaris 10 x86 because ALL my customers do.
The README.txt says to do a mvn jett6:run and it looks promising
at first, then starts billowing out whats in the log herein,
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DAYTRADER-26?page=all ]
Matt Hogstrom closed DAYTRADER-26.
--
Fix Version/s: 1.2
2.0
Resolution: Fixed
Trunk
Sending
Here is the entire message:
[INFO]
[INFO]Building Geronimo :: Mail
[INFO] task-segment: [install]
[INFO]
project-execute
While ripping out drywall this weekend I was thinking about our
Geronimo 2.0 and all the work that needs to get done to complete this
monsterous effort. While sifting through the scorecard and thinking
about all the different things that need to be addressed it became a
bit overwhelming.
There is indeed a
org.apache.geronimo.javamail:geronimo-javamail_1.3.1_provider:jar:1.0-SNAPSHOT
artifact
I just did an svn update and built the geronimo-mail module. It
downloaded the above artifact successfully from the apache-snapshots
repository.
Unless you have disabled snapshots, then you
Geronimo - Monday, December 4, 2006
3 Patches in RTC
[GERONIMO-2485] PersistenceUnitGBean needs a NamespaceDrivenDeployer
- Assignee: David Jencks
- Reporter: David Jencks
- Created: Wed Oct 11 21:23:29 GMT 2006
- Updated: Thu Nov 16 21:56:44 GMT 2006
-
Jason,
Thinking more about this, why do we even have the defaultAssemblyId
param there ? Why not have set the default-value on the assemblyId
parameter to be jetty ?
Having two params doing almost the same thing seems not only redudant
but also confusing. Am I missing something else here ?
David,
Thanks for moving the content of the sandbox over to trunk.
I noticed that these changes still differentiate the new jee5 vs. 1.4
items rather than replacing them by using names like jetty6,
transaction-jta11, web-2.5, etc... However, I thought that you were no
longer trying to
That got me through the problem. Thanks for help.
On 12/4/06, Prasad Kashyap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is indeed a
org.apache.geronimo.javamail:geronimo-javamail_1.3.1_provider:jar:1.0-SNAPSHOT
artifact
I just did an svn update and built the geronimo-mail module. It
downloaded the above
I created two new modules in specs/trunk:
geronimo-el_1.0_spec
geronimo-jsp_2.1_spec
Can someone help publish those to the snapshot repo? I have a nice
fruit cake I can regift if necessary (it's from last Christmas but
still looks exactly the same). Or I don't mind doing this myself if
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2613?page=comments#action_12455356
]
Paul McMahan commented on GERONIMO-2613:
let's use the dojo table widget to resolve the scrolling problems. It can
also truncate columns and
Ok, it looks like the error can easily be avoided if I just change the
reference in config.xml from transaction to transaction-jta11. It's
easy enough to do that but I'm still not sure of the intent. Do we want
the j2ee 1.4 servers using the jta11 transaction mgmt for now?
Thanks,
Joe
I figured it out... as far as the references and reference types I
wasn't doing anything wrong, the problem was specific to me updating
the Tomcat/Jetty Module Builders and that the SwitchingModuleBuilder
needed to be updated as well.
thx.
On Dec 2, 2006, at 3:59 AM, David Jencks wrote:
On Nov 30, 2006, at 5:59 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
Yesterday, I started working my way through the LICENSE and NOTICE
files to bring them up to snuff. It's a slow process. I've finished
lib and lib/endorsed. Starting on repository, now... Hope to be
done today.
Since we're embedding
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2594?page=all ]
Anita Kulshreshtha updated GERONIMO-2594:
-
Attachment: geronimo.diff
The trunk now generates 1.5 code. The xmlParserApis and xalan is not necessary.
I was able to remove xerces
Got some help on irc (thanks djencks). Just add the server to
~/.m2/settings.xml as described here
http://maven.apache.org/settings.html and then type mvn deploy.
Best wishes,
Paul
On 12/4/06, Paul McMahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I created two new modules in specs/trunk:
geronimo-el_1.0_spec
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2616?page=comments#action_12455369
]
David Jencks commented on GERONIMO-2616:
changed config.xmls to use transaction-jta11 in rev 482269, thanks to jbohn!
Move jee5 work from sandbox to
On Dec 4, 2006, at 9:21 AM, Joe Bohn wrote:
Ok, it looks like the error can easily be avoided if I just change
the reference in config.xml from transaction to transaction-
jta11. It's easy enough to do that but I'm still not sure of the
intent. Do we want the j2ee 1.4 servers using the
On Nov 30, 2006, at 9:06 PM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
Hi David,
This is a continuation of the discussion we had in the Testsuite
ready for action thread.
First, the openejb-itests-core would not start. I have submitted a
patch at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-391 Please
apply
Can't use SQL Server 2005 for persistence
-
Key: AMQ-1086
URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1086
Project: ActiveMQ
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Message Store
Affects
Thanx. I now have the ejbcontainer-testsuite included in the tests.
What's your take on the 5 errors and 2 failures ?
Cheers
Prasad
On 12/4/06, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 30, 2006, at 9:06 PM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
Hi David,
This is a continuation of the discussion we
Why would that save you time?
--jason
On Dec 4, 2006, at 6:44 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
Hi All,
is there a way I could locally get rid of the SNAPSHOT or the
revision number?
It will really save me a lot of time with the Geronimo v1.2
documentation.
Cheers!
Hernan
[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-1027?page=comments#action_37621 ]
Kieran Murphy commented on AMQ-1027:
My testing shows also that if a client is shutdown after failover but before it
has processed all of its prefetched
On Dec 4, 2006, at 3:45 AM, John Sisson wrote:
I had a quick look at the AntHill console and it looked pretty
cool. My initial thought was whether we would be discouraging
potential ISVs to use Geronimo as a basis of their solutions by
requiring them to license AntHill if they want to do
On Dec 4, 2006, at 6:53 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
If I'm getting the picture right, AH is just our solution to
building/testing G in an automated environment. Others are free to
continue to build G the same way they had always been building before.
Yup... pretty much.
--jason
Got latest code from trunk and tried to compile and getting compilation
errors in CXF module.
I had to install following dependencies manually:
cxf-rt-frontend-jaxws-2.0-incubator-M1-20061110.143844-5.jar
cxf-rt-transports-http-2.0-incubator-M1-20061110.143844-5.jar
Any help is appreciated.
basically screenshots. In the doc I'm including lost of screenshots (both
terminal and console) and these either show *SNAPSHOT* or *r480769*.
When we release v1.2 all these disappear so I would have to re-take those
screenshots that are affected, which is a large percentage.
Cheers!
Hernan
On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:30 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
Thanx. I now have the ejbcontainer-testsuite included in the tests.
What's your take on the 5 errors and 2 failures ?
Without walking through the code in a debugger, best I can tell there
are two things going wrong:
On Dec 4, 2006, at 12:43 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
On Nov 30, 2006, at 5:59 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
Yesterday, I started working my way through the LICENSE and NOTICE
files to bring them up to snuff. It's a slow process. I've
finished lib and lib/endorsed. Starting on repository, now...
On Dec 4, 2006, at 8:25 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
Thinking more about this, why do we even have the defaultAssemblyId
param there ? Why not have set the default-value on the assemblyId
parameter to be jetty ?
Because, if you configure the assemblyId from the pom, then you can
not override it
On Nov 30, 2006, at 1:34 PM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
What are the different areas of Geronimo that could do with some solid
functional testing ? I believe that TCK doesn't cover all areas of
Geronimo and not extensively, the ones it covers.
Please suggest areas/scenarios/tests that we should
Even though you manually installed the 2 cxf artifacts, you are
missing a lot of transitive dependencies that these artifacts should
have brought. I suspect something is wrong with your settings that it
is failing to download snapshots and their transitive deps.
Here are the other artifacts in
I think there are problems with hot deploy (based on GERONIMO-2522
and Rakesh's comments) and the offline deployer. I'll see if I can
look into these today.
thanks
david jencks
On Nov 29, 2006, at 7:32 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
First off I'd like to give everyone a hearty thank you to
On 12/4/06, Jason Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 4, 2006, at 8:25 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
Thinking more about this, why do we even have the defaultAssemblyId
param there ? Why not have set the default-value on the assemblyId
parameter to be jetty ?
Because, if you configure the
Jason,
What say ye ?
Cheers
Prasad
-- Forwarded message --
From: Emmanuel Venisse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Oct 24, 2006 8:35 AM
Subject: Re: selenium plugin?
To: Maven Users List users@maven.apache.org
Can you move this plugin in MOJO project?
Emmanuel
Prasad Kashyap a écrit
Implement PolicyContextHandlerSOAPMessage
-
Key: GERONIMO-2622
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2622
Project: Geronimo
Issue Type: Bug
Security Level: public (Regular issues)
No, this will not work.
The property defined in the pom will always be used.
* * *
And again... assemblyId${assemblyId}/assemblyId is the default!
So this is pointless pom configuration.
--jason
On Dec 4, 2006, at 11:27 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
On 12/4/06, Jason Dillon [EMAIL
I agree, there must be something wrong in my settings. I got the code from
trunk and using maven to compile (from netbeans). Could it be maven
settings?? thanks for all your help.
On 12/4/06, Prasad Kashyap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even though you manually installed the 2 cxf artifacts, you
Seems more like netbeans settings to me.
Cheers
Prasad
On 12/4/06, Apparao Kalimireddy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree, there must be something wrong in my settings. I got the code from
trunk and using maven to compile (from netbeans). Could it be maven
settings?? thanks for all your help.
Made a couple extra fixes too and published new snapshots of the itests.
-David
On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:18 AM, David Blevins wrote:
On Nov 30, 2006, at 9:06 PM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
Hi David,
This is a continuation of the discussion we had in the Testsuite
ready for action thread.
First,
Hi All,
are we shipping Apache Directory 0.92 with Geronimo v1.2 again? if so, that's
great.
I just built 1.2 and when I tried to install Apache Directory plugin it showed
up as *already installed*
I probably missed a bunch of mails but all I found was about integrating
TripleSec as the JACC
Thanx David for taking care of those.
The DummyTest.java didn't go into trunk. Can you please do the needful ?
Thanx
Prasad
On 12/4/06, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Made a couple extra fixes too and published new snapshots of the itests.
-David
On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:18 AM, David
Minor Linux Build Issues
Key: AMQCPP-21
URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP-21
Project: ActiveMQ C++ Client
Issue Type: Bug
Environment: Linux
Reporter: Albert Strasheim
Hey all,
I was looking at the getConnectedSSLSocket method in the
SMTPTransport.javaclass for javamail and I was confused. There is a
section that consists of
a while loop whose condition is true. Within this while loop is code to
create a socket connection with a server. I am confused as to
[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP-17?page=comments#action_37622
]
Albert Strasheim commented on AMQCPP-17:
Problem mostly solved.
You might consider using a different path for CppUnit. If there's a Win32
installer for
IMO the MN notation here is really confusing for a post-1.0 release.
I also don't really get the Dec 22 thing at all... If we are lucky
we will get 1.2 out by then.
But, I'm not trying to knock any of this ambition... just a comment.
--jason
On Dec 4, 2006, at 7:54 AM, Matt Hogstrom
Why does it matter?
If the final release for a given screen is the same as the snap, then
why bother updating it?
--jason
On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:54 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
basically screenshots. In the doc I'm including lost of
screenshots (both terminal and console) and these either
Jason Warner wrote:
Hey all,
I was looking at the getConnectedSSLSocket method in the
SMTPTransport.java class for javamail and I was confused. There is a
section that consists of a while loop whose condition is true. Within
this while loop is code to create a socket connection with a
These are both new specs right? Why are they starting with 1.1-
SNAPSHOT?
Really, if we are going to version these modules separately, then
they should start at 1.0-SNAPSHOT. If we version the entire project
together, then its obviously fine to add new modules when the version
is not
Infinite loop in the SMTPTransport code when a socket factory class is used.
-
Key: GERONIMO-2623
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2623
Project: Geronimo
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DAYTRADER-14?page=all ]
Matt Hogstrom closed DAYTRADER-14.
--
Fix Version/s: 1.2
2.0
Resolution: Fixed
Assignee: Matt Hogstrom
trunk/
Sending
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2623?page=all ]
Rick McGuire closed GERONIMO-2623.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Committed revision 482370.
Infinite loop in the SMTPTransport code when a socket factory class is used.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DAYTRADER-24?page=all ]
Matt Hogstrom closed DAYTRADER-24.
--
Fix Version/s: 1.2
2.0
Resolution: Fixed
Assignee: Matt Hogstrom
branches/1.2
Sending
On Dec 4, 2006, at 9:44 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
Hi All,
is there a way I could locally get rid of the SNAPSHOT or the
revision number?
It will really save me a lot of time with the Geronimo v1.2
documentation.
Hernan,
You can always update your pom.xml locally and change the Geronimo
On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:20 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
Why does it matter?
If the final release for a given screen is the same as the snap,
then why bother updating it?
I think Hernan wants to generate screenshots which will look like the
actual 1.2 release. The current screenshots must
I think that is asking for trouble... lots of trouble.
--jason
On Dec 4, 2006, at 1:43 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On Dec 4, 2006, at 9:44 AM, Hernan Cunico wrote:
Hi All,
is there a way I could locally get rid of the SNAPSHOT or the
revision number?
It will really save me a lot of time
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP-21?page=all ]
Timothy Bish reassigned AMQCPP-21:
--
Assignee: Timothy Bish (was: Nathan Mittler)
Minor Linux Build Issues
Key: AMQCPP-21
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP-21?page=all ]
Timothy Bish resolved AMQCPP-21.
Resolution: Fixed
Fixed in Trunk
Minor Linux Build Issues
Key: AMQCPP-21
URL:
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP-21?page=all ]
Work on AMQCPP-21 started by Timothy Bish.
Minor Linux Build Issues
Key: AMQCPP-21
URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP-21
Project:
is this all for web console shots? If so, then update the console to
make that configurable.
But if its for build shorts, like capturing what mvn spits out, then
I think that its be a very bad idea to change the project version
just for a screen shot.
Actually I think its a waste of
Eh... I don't really care too much...
I guess I'm fine with moving this... though it currently depends on
some Genesis muck, which is not gonna move, and I' d rather not
unroll it, or duplicate it... though seems like to have plugins share
code, especially common mojo with config hooks you
On 12/4/06, Jason Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These are both new specs right? Why are they starting with 1.1-
SNAPSHOT?
Yes they are new specs. I used 1.1-SNAPSHOT because the spec I was
using as a template (geronimo-servlet_2.5_spec) started with that
version number. Wish I had poked
yup, that's pretty much my point. Not that the reader wont be able to
understand the doc if the screenshots look different from the final release.
But it will make the content more clear, more representative of the release
covered.
Cheers!
Hernan
Kevan Miller wrote:
On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:20
yup, that's pretty much my point. Not that the reader wont be able to
understand the doc if the screenshots look different from the final release.
But it will make the content more clear, more representative of the release
covered.
Cheers!
Hernan
Kevan Miller wrote:
On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:20
Thanks, James for the info relating to using interceptor for broker for
finding the amount of messages per priority waiting to be sent to consumer.
Could you provide some examples of how the broker interceptor is written and
configured ?
- Sreenivas
James.Strachan wrote:
You could write
On Dec 4, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Paul McMahan wrote:
Yes they are new specs. I used 1.1-SNAPSHOT because the spec I was
using as a template (geronimo-servlet_2.5_spec) started with that
version number. Wish I had poked around a little more and I would
have realized.
No worries... not picking on
I think this is kinda dangerous...
For example, what if you had that property to make it look like the
1.2 final release and then the UI was actually changed. You now have
confused users wondering why the 1.2 shot on the website is different
from the final.
And what happens when 1.2.1
We should move this to the dev list :-)
Sorry for the delay, I wrote up some info on JACC at http://
cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GMOxDEV/JACC+Guide
I'll try to work on it some more and see if I can figure out how to
link it from the dev wiki page.
I don't know of much other info
[ https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQCPP-3?page=all ]
Stan Halerman reopened AMQCPP-3:
Hope this helps, with 4.1.0 the example program from cpp-1.0-src (on FC 3)
this error still seems to occur)
Sent message from thread -1219314768
Yes, this is the best way... merge from 1.2 to trunk, as *most* of
those changes will be fairly simple to apply, and automatic with SVK
(well, up until the point when we rearrange trunk, but until then).
But some minor changes may also need to go the other way. SVK should
be able to
Offline deployer busted
---
Key: GERONIMO-2624
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2624
Project: Geronimo
Issue Type: Bug
Security Level: public (Regular issues)
Affects Versions: 1.2, 2.0
On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:59 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
So, I'm not sure of anymore work to be done for the Geronimo
portions of a release. Oh the Disclaimer. IMO, since we are
embedding incubating projects, we should add a DISCLAIMER file to
the root dir of our source tree, a disclaimer file in
On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:56 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
is this all for web console shots? If so, then update the console
to make that configurable.
But if its for build shorts, like capturing what mvn spits out,
then I think that its be a very bad idea to change the project
version just for a
On Dec 4, 2006, at 1:50 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
What? How did you get the idea that everyone has to use AntHill to
build Geronimo?
You, or anyone are free to use any tool you like to build Geronimo
in any fashion you prefer. I have just found that the other build
automation systems
1 - 100 of 110 matches
Mail list logo
